Module 5 foundations emergency managment

Students will design a comprehensive stakeholder engagement plan that leverages collaborative partnerships with government agencies, private sector organizations, and community groups to develop and execute a coordinated approach to emergency planning and preparedness within the chosen town from the first assignment.

Objective ctive: Students will design a comprehensive stakeholder engagement plan that leverages collaborative partnerships with government agencies, private sector organizations, and community groups to develop and execute a coordinated approach to emergency planning and preparedness within the chosen town from the first assignment.

Instructions:

Consider the multidisciplinary team created for the Module 3 Posttest. Write a short, 2-3 page reflection essay where you consider the following.

Review the Stakeholder Team:

1.
Recap the Stakeholder Team:

· Provide a brief overview of the stakeholder team formed in Module 3.

· Highlight the roles and responsibilities of each team member.

Engaging Stakeholders:

2.
Engagement Strategies:

· Describe specific strategies for engaging each type of stakeholder in the emergency planning process.

· What types of meetings, workshops, training sessions, and communication channels would be most appropriate for engagement?

3.
Building Collaborative Partnerships:

· Explain how to foster collaborative partnerships among stakeholders.

· How might you build trust and transparency and create mutually beneficial goals?

4.
Communication Plan:

· Develop a communication plan to ensure all stakeholders are informed and involved throughout the planning process.

· How might you best disseminate information to all stakeholders? What might be the best way to gather feedback? How can you ensure lines of communication remain open?

Developing the Emergency Plan:

5.
Collaborative Plan Development:

· Outline the steps for collaboratively developing the emergency plan with stakeholder input.

· How will you invite stakeholders to share their expertise and contribute to the plan?

6.
Resource Allocation:

· Identify the resources each stakeholder can provide, such as funding, personnel, equipment, and facilities.

· How might these resources be coordinated and utilized effectively?

Implementation and Maintenance:

7.
Plan Implementation:

· Detail the steps for implementing the emergency plan with stakeholder involvement.

· What training, drills, and exercises would be needed to ensure readiness? How frequently should they be conducted?

8.
Monitoring and Evaluation:

· Describe methods for continuously monitoring and evaluating the plan’s effectiveness.

· How might stakeholder feedback and post-disaster analyses be used to update and improve the plan?

Tips & Reminders:

· Due to the reflective nature of this assignment, sources are not required. However, if sources are used, they should be cited in APA 7th edition. All sources should be cited in

APA 7th edition.

· This assignment is worth 90 points and will be evaluated by a

Grading Rubric

· Use headings to organize your reflection; be sure you answer all questions.

· AI may not be used in the completion of this assignment.

· Students will have 3 attempts to complete this assignment. Failure to demonstrate competency of 80% within 3 attempts will mean a failing grade in the course.

Guidance for Stakeholder
Engagement
Project Planning and Discovery Process

November 2021

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

This page intentionally left blank

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Guidance Document 102 November 2021 i

Requirements for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Risk Mapping, Assessment,
and Planning (Risk MAP) Program are specified separately by statute, regulation, or FEMA policy
(primarily the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping). This document provides guidance to
support the requirements and recommends approaches for effective and efficient implementation.
Alternate approaches that comply with all requirements are acceptable.

For more information, please visit the “FEMA Guidelines and Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and
Mapping” webpage (https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/guidance-reports/guidelines-standards).
Copies of the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping Policy, related guidance, technical
references, and other information about the guidelines and standards development process are all
available here. You can also search directly by document title at www.fema.gov/multimedia-library..

https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/guidance-reports/guidelines-standards

http://www.fema.gov/multimedia-library

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Guidance Document 102 November 2021 ii

Table of Revisions

Affected Section
or Subsection Date Description

Subsections
5.2.3, 5.3, 5.4,
7.1 and 7.4

November
2021

Minor updates to incorporate references to virtual meetings
and correct broken links.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Guidance Document 102 November 2021 iii

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

2. Audiences

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

3. Additional Resources and Tools

………………………………………………………………………………….. 6

4. Project Planning and Discovery—Overview of Objectives

………………………………………………… 6

4.1. Project Planning Phase ……………………………………………………………………………………. 6

4.2. Discovery Phase ………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. The Importance of Stakeholder Engagement

……………………………………………………………….. 7

5.1. Stakeholder Engagement Goals ……………………………………………………………………….

5.1.1. Discovery Planning ………………………………………………………………………………. 8

5.1.2. Discovery Phase …………………………………………………………………………………..

5.2. Types of Stakeholders …………………………………………………………………………………..

5.2.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………… 10

5.2.2. Internal Stakeholders ……………………………………………………………………….. 10

5.2.3. External Stakeholders – Public Sector ………………………………………………..

5.3. Pre-Discovery Meeting Engagement Activities …………………………………………………

5.4. Stakeholder Engagement Techniques and Tools …………………………………………….

6. Discovery Activities

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

6.1. Initial and Sustained Contacts with Project Stakeholders ……………………………….. 23

6.2. Mitigation Planning Activities and Local Hazard Mitigation Plans ……………………..

6.2.1. Data and Information Collection ………………………………………………………… 24

6.2.2. Discovery Meeting ……………………………………………………………………………..

6.2.3. Coordination with Mitigation Planning Activities and Hazard Mitigation
Plans ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 25

6.3. Data and Information Collection and Evaluation ……………………………………………..

6.4. Data and Information Collection Activities ……………………………………………………… 26

6.5. Data and Information Analysis Activities …………………………………………………………

6.6. Discovery Map ………………………………………………………………………………………………

6.7. Discovery Report ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29

7. Discovery Meeting

…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 30

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Guidance Document 102 November 2021 iv

7.1. Meeting Timing ……………………………………………………………………………………………..

7.2. Meeting Attendees ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 31

7.3. Inviting Stakeholders …………………………………………………………………………………….

7.4. Meeting Objectives ………………………………………………………………………………………. 32

7.5. Meeting Messages ………………………………………………………………………………………..

7.6. Pre-Meeting Activities …………………………………………………………………………………… 34

7.7. Meeting Activities ………………………………………………………………………………………….

7.8. Post-Meeting Activities …………………………………………………………………………………..

8. Automated Engineering

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

9. Scope Refinement

…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37

9.1. Project Charter ……………………………………………………………………………………………..

10. Finalizing Discovery

…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 41

11. File Maintenance

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 41

List of Figures

Figure 1. Risk MAP Project Lifecycle …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5

List of Tables

Table 1: FIMA Directorates – Programs, Initiatives, Activities ………………………………………………………

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

1. Introduction
This document is meant for flood risk project teams involved in the Project Planning and Discovery
phases of the Risk Mapping, Assessment and Planning (Risk MAP) program. It describes the kinds of
community and stakeholder engagement activities to consider during these phases. This document
is designed to complement Discovery guidance provided in “Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and
Mapping: Discovery.”

Figure 1. Risk MAP Project Lifecycle

The goal of stakeholder engagement during Project Planning and Discovery is to help community
members understand their risk and become more resilient. While the flood map is a critical product
delivered through Risk MAP, it is meant to be a tool for communities to use when evaluating their
flood risk. All short-term goals for the Project Team and partners should support the overarching goal
of resilience for each community in the watershed or project area. As such, the Project Team and
partners should support communities as they develop mitigation actions personalized to their unique
needs. Stakeholder engagement and the inclusion of mitigation planning technical assistance into
flood risk projects can be key ingredients for achieving these outcomes. See “Guidance for Flood
Risk Analysis and Mapping: Incorporating Mitigation Planning Technical Assistance into Flood Risk
Projects” for more information.

More guidance on interacting with stakeholders (in all phases of the Risk MAP process) is available
in “Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement: Introduction and Key Terms.” It includes overviews of the
following topics:

 Issues that Project Teams should consider during coastal or levee flood risk projects.

 Issues that Project Teams should consider when working with sovereign tribal nations.

 Effects of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) reform legislation on flood mapping studies.

 Federal policies related to flood mapping studies.

 Supplemental resources to consider when engaging with project stakeholders.

 Definitions for common key terms.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

More guidance on the Discovery phase—specifically on identifying flood hazards and associated flood
risk and mitigation activities in this phase—is available in “Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and
Mapping: Discovery.” Additional guidance on the Project Planning phase can be found in “Guidance
for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping: Project Planning.”

2. Audiences
The primary audiences for this guidance document are staff from the 10 Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) regional offices and FEMA headquarters, and the Project Teams formed
to carry out the Project Planning and Discovery processes. While Project Planning typically requires
involvement by FEMA staff (with some support provided by the Regional Program Management
Liaison [RPML] and Program Management [PM] provider staff), the Discovery phase can include
significant participation by other Risk MAP providers and partners serving FEMA headquarters and
regions, such as the Community Engagement and Risk Communication (CERC) provider, the
Production and Technical Services (PTS) provider, and Cooperating Technical Partners (CTPs).

3. Additional Resources and Tools
Throughout this document, you will find links to supplemental materials on the FEMA Risk
Management Directorate (RMD) SharePoint Portal. These supplemental materials, which are meant
to complement the information in this guidance document, include the following:

 Tactical tips or “how-to” guides on topics like designing effective presentations, handling
contentious community questions, or working with local media.

 Resources for best practices in community engagement, such as the CERC Playbook.

 Case studies that highlight community and stakeholder engagement during the Project Planning
and Discovery phase.

4. Project Planning and Discovery—Overview of
Objectives

4.1. Project Planning Phase
Project Planning, which takes place every year, is the first phase in the Risk MAP lifecycle. It is used
to prioritize project areas and to estimate the budget for (1) the Discovery process or (2) the
development and delivery of flood risk projects after the Discovery process.

The objectives of the Project Planning phase are to prioritize watersheds/project areas for review
and to develop budget estimates for projects. This phase is led by regional teams working with
states to achieve the following:

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 A clearer understanding of state preferences and priorities for the scope and prioritization
schedules for the flood risk project.

 Collect information that FEMA regional offices can use to prioritize project areas for Discovery or
for flood risk projects and to develop project plans and budget estimates.

 Compliance with the requirements of Section 216 of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform
Act of 2012 (BW12), as amended by the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014
(HFIAA).

 Information that may help regions meet Risk MAP metrics as they are identified.

4.2. Discovery Phase
FEMA begins the Discovery process after planning and allocating a budget, when watersheds/project
areas of interest have been identified and selected. FEMA’s primary objectives are to:

 Engage project stakeholders to start the foundation for relationships that will be built throughout
the project.

 Understand the communities’ data, technical assistance, training, and other needs.

 Introduce or enhance flood risk discussions.

 Balance local needs with FEMA resources and plan for a possible flood risk project.

Discovery activities include developing a stakeholder engagement plan for the community or
watershed, gathering data and information, developing a Discovery map (optional) and a Discovery
report (required), and engaging project stakeholders before, during, and after Discovery meetings. If
FEMA decides that a flood risk project may be appropriate based on need, the available resources,
and the community’s interest, Discovery activities will also include engaging with communities to
discuss expected changes to flood hazard information, defining the scope of the flood risk project,
and outlining for project stakeholders the expected next steps (e.g., engineering models to be used,
products and services to be provided, timeline, outcomes, roles/responsibilities, data sources). All
flood risk projects must have a communication plan designed to keep project stakeholders informed
of all key decisions, draft findings, and finished outputs. The plan should also be designed to
regularly involve key stakeholders in discussions about local risks and potential actions to manage
and reduce those risks.

5. The Importance of Stakeholder Engagement
While developing updated flood maps for a community or watershed/project area is an important
aspect of Risk MAP, the overarching goal of the process is to help communities have a more holistic
understanding of their changing risks and know what actions they can take to achieve resilience.
Communities are much more likely to act when they feel invested in the process, and these early

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

phases are an opportunity to show that FEMA is fully committed to helping local officials and other
stakeholders throughout this journey—not just during Risk MAP meetings or at other flood risk project
milestones.

FEMA and its Project Teams should think of themselves as partners to the communities they work
with, and a critical objective of these first phases—beyond making decisions about flood risk
projects—is establishing or strengthening collaborative working relationships with key local
stakeholders. Through a stronger approach to stakeholder engagement, FEMA can also make it
easier for federal, state, and local mapping partners to exchange information throughout the lifecycle
of a flood risk project.

5.1. Stakeholder Engagement Goals

5.1.1. DISCOVERY PLANNING
Engagement with both internal and external stakeholders while planning for the Discovery phase is
essential. Key questions that the Project Teams typically ask while planning for Discovery include:

1. What can the Discovery planning team learn that will help the community become more
resilient?

2. What other stakeholders should be considered for this project area, beyond traditional
stakeholders such as other federal agencies, state agencies, and local officials? For example,
librarians, who may be able to help community members understand flood mapping resources
and information; major land holders that could be a strategic partner; or local nongovernmental
or civic organizations that can help advocate for the goals of the flood risk project.

3. How can the Discovery planning team incorporate local demographic and socioeconomic
information to inform FEMA’s stakeholder engagement approach?

Ultimately, the goal is to learn as much as the team can about the community before the Discovery
meeting, so the meeting is tailored to be as useful and productive as possible.

Stakeholder engagement during Discovery planning should be flexible and scalable—each FEMA
regional office, watershed, and community is unique. Some common goals of successful stakeholder
engagement during Discovery planning are listed here:

 Stronger relationships, a sense of partnership, and shared objectives between FEMA, community
officials, and other stakeholders

 A clearer understanding of which flood risk project activities may benefit the area most

 Plans and estimates for how the Risk MAP investment may be used to identify, communicate, or
reduce risk in a targeted area

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

5.1.2. DISCOVERY PHASE
Although engagement with federal, state, and regional partners begins during the Project Planning
phase, engagement with communities and other stakeholders begins during the Discovery phase.
During the initial coordination with watershed/project stakeholders, the Project Team collects data
and information that will help them accomplish the following:

 Understand the watershed or project area—and the community/communities within it—in a more
comprehensive and holistic way (not through mapping and engineering study needs alone).

 Establish or improve relationships with state partners, community officials, key influencers, and
other project stakeholders.

 Establish the trust and transparency required for successful, longer term collaboration with
communities, to last across the Risk MAP lifecycle and into the future.

 Help communities understand why identifying flood hazards is important to their long-term
resilience, and connect them to mitigation planning and action through reducing local flood risk.

 Determine the level and types of mitigation planning and other assistance (such as training,
outreach and communication, mitigation scenario development, ordinance support including the
identification of appropriate higher standards, substantial damage planning, and other support)
the communities need.

 Learn about the communities’ capabilities, including GIS knowledge, to see what kind of
assistance they will need from FEMA or other partners to understand and use the data generated
by a flood risk project.

 Identify data that may be used to create regulatory products, including Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs), Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, and FIRM databases.

 Identify data that may be used to create Flood Risk Products, such as Flood Risk Databases,
Flood Risk Reports, and Flood Risk Maps.

 Identify factors that may be contributing (positively or negatively) to flooding and flood losses in a
watershed. (Some of these items may eventually be used for Areas of Mitigation Interest, one of
the Flood Risk Datasets in the Flood Risk Database.)

If FEMA knows at this stage which engineering models the agency will use to update the flood hazard
information shown on the FIRM, then the Project Team must notify each community affected by the
update of the engineering models it plans to use. In addition, the Project Team must give the
communities (1) an explanation of the appropriateness of using these models, and (2) a 30-day
period to consult with FEMA on the appropriateness of the engineering models. These actions will
meet the requirements of Section 216 of BW-12 and FEMA Standard ID (SID) 620. The Project Team
can access templates to support the implementation of SID 620 through the password-protected

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

RMD SharePoint Portal in the Flood Mapping Letter Repository or by contacting the FEMA Project
Officer. This step can also be performed later in the study, after the Discovery phase.

Collecting and Maintaining Stakeholder Contact Information
During Discovery, the Project Team must engage all communities and the appropriate level of project
stakeholders identified within the project area. Getting the project stakeholders to the table early
and engaging them in a meaningful way is important. The contacts and stakeholder information
identified during the Discovery phase will be used throughout the flood risk project. It is important for
the Project Team to collect contact information for community officials—particularly the Chief
Executive Officers (CEOs) and Floodplain Administrators (FPAs)—and keep them current throughout
the flood risk project.

One source of this information is the FEMA Community Information System (CIS). After compiling an
initial contact list using community websites and CIS, the Project Team may find it helpful to refine
the list with the assistance of the State NFIP Coordinator, the State Hazard Mitigation Officer
(SHMO), and representatives of larger communities in the watershed/project area. In addition, to
avoid unnecessary duplication of federal, state, or local mapping efforts, coordinating with state and
federal partners at the beginning of the flood risk project is important. Note that CIS is accessible to
users with FEMA Personal Identity Verification (PIV) cards. Other Project Team members may request
access to CIS by visiting https://portal.fema.gov/famsVuWeb/home.

5.2. Types of Stakeholders
This section broadly outlines the kinds of stakeholders—internal and external, federal and local,
government and private—that might be considered when building a stakeholder engagement plan
during the Discovery phase of the flood risk project. Project Team should determine their project
stakeholders appropriately, based on the area being studied.

5.2.1. INTRODUCTION
During the Risk MAP lifecycle, Project Teams may tend to refer to “stakeholders” or “the community”
as if these terms represent a single group with similar goals and objectives. Instead, for more
successful engagement, it is important to consider the many kinds of stakeholders and community
audiences, and the needs (and values) of these distinct groups.

If tribal lands are included in a project area, Project Teams must coordinate with the Tribal Liaison in
the FEMA regional office. Additional tribal considerations are addressed in Section 4.0 of “Guidance
for Stakeholder Engagement: Introduction and Key Terms.”

5.2.2. INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS
In addition to coordinating with external stakeholders, the Project Team may want to engage (or
continue to engage) with internal partners, such as the following:

https://portal.fema.gov/famsVuWeb/home

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) staff at FEMA headquarters

 FEMA regional offices that are not represented on the Project Team (neighboring or
geographically similar regions)

 Regional Branches, both within and outside of the Mitigation Division

 Any Risk MAP providers (e.g., the CERC, PTS, Customer and Data Services [CDS], or Program
Management providers) that are not represented on the Project Team

FIMA is charged with integrating the efforts of teams who oversee individual programs within its
organization, to ensure that resources are well managed. FIMA takes steps to reduce duplication and
confirm that teams cooperate to achieve complementary goals and objectives. The FIMA Risk
Management Directorate (RMD), Mitigation Directorate (MD), Federal Insurance Directorate (FID),
Fund Management Directorate, Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (OEHP),
and Office of the Flood Insurance Advocate (OFIA) are uniquely positioned to accomplish this
because of the natural synergies among the staff and the programs, initiatives, and activities they
oversee. Some of the program initiatives and activities FIMA oversees are listed in Table 1.

Potential inputs the team might receive from internal stakeholders are listed below.

 Key Decision Point information

 Planning and funding memorandums released by RMD, including metrics and areas of focus

 Coordinated Needs Management Strategy (CNMS) data and New, Valid, and Updated
Engineering (NVUE) forecast/projection data

 Project Planning and Purchasing Portal (P4) data

 Available risk data or prioritization algorithm data (previous version available in P4 as a
reference layer)

 Population data from the FEMA Community Layer

 Mitigation Planning Portal data, such as information on the Mitigation Plan Cycle to help
synchronize the timing of plan updates with Risk MAP projects

 Community Rating System (CRS) information

 BureauNet insurance information

 CIS data

 Information on communities’ potential for taking mitigation actions, which could be in the form of
a database or spreadsheet and could include an assortment of community information, hazard

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

information, insurance and NFIP-related information, planning and grant information, mapping
information, and disaster-related information, such as Mitigation Assessment Team
reports/data, recovery advisories, and case studies (if applicable)

 Internal records that can help identify congressional, regional, and local priorities, including:

o Congressional and Freedom of Information Act correspondence

o Other correspondence exchanged between FEMA, communities, and other stakeholders

o Email messages and telephone records from the FEMA Map Information eXchange, other
FEMA call centers, and OFIA

 Lessons learned/institutional knowledge that may not be documented in the Knowledge Sharing
Site

 Engagement tools, such as the CERC Playbook, that help decision-makers think strategically and
consistently about community engagement

Table 1: FIMA Directorates – Programs, Initiatives, Activities

FIMA
Directorate Programs, Initiatives, and Activities

• Building Science Activities and Initiatives
• CTP Program
• Data Warehouse, Flood Mapping Information eXchange, and Information

Technology Management
• Mitigation Assessment Team Program
• Multi-hazard Risk Assessment
• National Dam Safety Program
• National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
• Multi-hazard Mitigation Planning
• National Levee Safety Program
• Natural Hazards Risk Assessment Program
• Rehabilitation of High Hazard Potential Dams (HHPD) Grant Program
• Risk MAP Program

• Community Assistance Program
• Community Assistance Program–State Support Services Element

Program
• Community Rating System
• Flood Mitigation Assistance Program

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

FIMA
Directorate Programs, Initiatives, and Activities

• Floodplain Management
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post Fire
• Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force
• Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program

OFIA is another potential resource for Project Team engagement within FIMA. Section 24 of HFIAA
directed FEMA to establish a Flood Insurance Advocate to work for the fair treatment of NFIP
policyholders and property owners. This resulted in the OFIA, which responds to requests from the
public about fair treatment in the areas of flood hazard mapping, flood risk identification, and
actions that minimize the risk of flooding.

As a result of their day-to-day activities, OFIA staff may have information that could help Project
Teams identify areas with mapping or risk assessment needs in specific watersheds or communities.
Project Teams are encouraged to engage with OFIA staff, and the two-way communication that takes
place during Discovery may be equally beneficial to the OFIA. Project Teams may provide information
on planned flood risk projects for areas that the OFIA encounters when responding to an inquiry.

5.2.3. EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS – PUBLIC SECTOR

Other Federal Agencies
Project Teams should consider other federal agencies as partners in the Risk MAP program. These
agencies may be able to support the development of hazard information as well as helping to
communicate flood risk and support activities to reduce flood risk in communities. Other federal
agencies may also help the FEMA regions prioritize project areas or identify appropriate project
activities, based on their spheres of knowledge and their planned or in-progress risk mitigation
activities.

Project Teams should collect data and information at the state or regional level all at once, when
possible, to assist in project sequencing. This will keep the Risk MAP program activities efficient and
within budget.

For additional information on coordination with other federal agencies and the types of data and
information that may be available through coordinating with federal partners, interested parties
should refer to “Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping: Discovery.”

Regional and State Partners
State and local CTPs, State NFIP Coordinators, and SHMOs are considered partners of the Risk MAP
program, but Project Teams should also consider other state agencies as partners. They also may be

https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

able to support the development of hazard information, help communicate flood risk, and support
activities to reduce flood risk, including providing technical assistance to communities.

During the Project Planning phase, engagement with state CTPs, State NFIP Coordinators, SHMOs,
and other state agency officials could include discussions of the watershed/project area and which
areas they would prioritize for mitigation or new data, based on their local knowledge.

During the Discovery phase (and periodically in later phases), Project Teams should plan to engage
with any relevant regional agency or organization in the watershed or geographic area that is the
focus of the project.

Potential Regional and State Partners
 Cooperating Technical Partners

 State NFIP Coordinators

 SHMOs and State Mitigation Planners

 CRS Coordinators and Insurance Services Office Specialists

 State/regional agencies that own/operate levees or dams

 State/regional historic preservation offices

 State/regional dam safety officials

 State departments of environmental protection

 State/regional transportation or transportation planning departments

 State housing and economic development authorities

 State/regional planning districts and authorities

 State/regional flood control, water management, and soil and water conservation districts and
authorities

 State/regional economic development commissions, councils, boards, authorities, and agencies

Collecting and assessing the information obtained during the Project Planning phase may help the
FEMA region identify which areas have the highest risk or involve contributing factors that indicate
which Risk MAP activities may be appropriate and the potential level of effort required to accomplish
them. The detailed evaluation of information for the watershed or project area takes place during the
Discovery phase. For additional information on the types of data and information that may be

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

available through coordination with state and regional partners, refer to “Guidance for Flood Risk
Analysis and Mapping: Discovery.”

Federal and State Elected Officials
It is wise to engage with federal and state elected officials who represent the watershed/project
area, early in the flood risk project process. These officials could include U.S. senators and
representatives, state senators and representatives, and the governor. Notifying these officials about
the flood risk project is an opportunity to remind them of the broader goals of the Risk MAP program
in encouraging community resilience. Moreover, winning their support early in the mapping process
could be helpful later to minimize disruptions or delays that could be caused by misunderstanding
and under-involvement. These are also good opportunities to ask elected officials to champion
mitigation projects within local communities and emphasize to community officials the importance of
adopting the latest consensus-based hazard-resistant building codes and standards. Many citizens
also report flooding and flood-related concerns to their officials. FEMA may hear about additional
problem areas and challenges by including senators, representatives, and governors in the Discovery
conversation.

National, Regional and State Associations and Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs)

Project Teams may also consider engaging with state-level or regional professional associations or
NGOs that focus on land or water conservancy. These organizations may have helpful data to share,
or individual members could be potential key influencers in communicating flood risk and supporting
activities that reduce flood risk in the watershed/project area.

Potential national associations and NGO partners (which may have regional, state, or local affiliates)

 American Planning Association

 American Red Cross

 American Rivers

 American Society of Civil Engineers

 American Public Works Association

 American Water Resources Association

 Association of State Dam Safety Officials

 Association of State Floodplain Managers

 National Association of Counties

 National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 National Emergency Management Association

 National Flood Determination Association

 National League of Cities

 Natural Hazard Mitigation Association

 Nature Conservancy

 Natural Resources Defense Council

 Others, as appropriate for the watershed or geographic area being considered

Project Teams should also consider whether engagement with the Resilient Nation Partnership
Network (RNPN) could be helpful in a study project. The RNPN is a network of NGOs, private sector
groups, and federal and state agencies. FEMA established this network to bring together
organizations for more holistic conversations about resilience. These partners—or the local or
regional branches of member organizations—may be helpful in supporting FEMA’s mapping projects.
To date, the RNPN has grown to more than 500 organizations, featuring a diversity of thought
leaders in many areas of resilience. Represented sectors include academia, infrastructure, policy,
science and research, conservation, law enforcement, local and state governments, medicine, and
more.

To learn more about or engage with the RNPN, Project Teams can coordinate with the CERC provider
and refer to this webpage: https://www.fema.gov/business-industry/resilient-nation-partnership-
network.

Local Partners
Community-level engagement is essential during the Discovery phase. These community contacts
usually include, at a minimum, the CEOs—mayors, county/parish judges, county executives, or the
president or chair of the board of supervisors or council—and FPAs.

Beyond community CEOs and FPAs, Project Teams should consider a broad array of community
stakeholders to engage when starting a flood risk project. These community members may have
information that can help the Project Team learn more about the community and inform a better
assessment of its risks or highlight unique challenges the community has faced in the past. They can
also offer insights into unique capabilities or experiences within the community that can be
referenced as the flood risk project continues. In addition, early engagement with community
stakeholders can help inform an approach to community engagement that will affect all phases of
the flood risk project, not just Discovery.

https://www.fema.gov/business-industry/resilient-nation-partnership-network

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

The community FPA can be a key partner in helping identify which other community stakeholders
would be most helpful to work with during the flood risk project. Agencies, departments, or groups in
the following disciplines are potential partners:

 Infrastructure

o Planning and emergency management (including GIS or CRS coordinators)

o Transportation

o Land use (including private developers)

o Environment (including local environmental NGOs)

o Parks and recreation

o Building/code enforcement

 Social Services

o Community affairs

o Housing, Health and Human Services

o Local civic organizations and nonprofits

o Economic development agencies

o Utilities

o Sewer

o Water

o Power

o Electric

o Telecommunications

 Others

o Critical facilities (e.g., hospital administrators, police and fire chiefs, school administrators)

o Chambers of Commerce

o Faith-based organizations

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

o Local universities or other academic institutions

o Civic organizations

5.3. Pre-Discovery Meeting Engagement Activities
Before contacting any local officials or other stakeholders for Discovery, Project Team members
should gather as much publicly available information and data about the community as possible
from both internal and external sources. They should also coordinate with internal stakeholders and
partners. FEMA information that may be useful in understanding a community includes:

 National Risk Index, which includes data on 18 natural hazards, social vulnerabilities, and
community resilience

 Community Assistance Visits and Community Assistance Calls
 Mitigation planning training or technical assistance requests
 Technical assistance requests from Floodplain Management and Insurance under the

Community Assistance Program
 Mitigation grants applied for and awarded
 Recent disaster declarations
 Other indicators or data from the Community Engagement Prioritization Tool

(https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk/community-engagement-
prioritization-tool)

Reviewing a community website could provide an overview of its floodplain, stormwater, mitigation,
and emergency management activities and organizational structure, which could guide the selection
of community contacts for the Discovery process. Other useful community information can include:

 Organization of the community and the various departments and divisions, including their roles
and responsibilities

 Planning documents (e.g., hazard mitigation plans, emergency management plans, master plans)

 Stormwater ordinances

 Maps

 Contact information for community officials

 Lists of levee districts or drainage districts, district contact information, levee maintenance
plans, or drainage master plans

 Floodplain management ordinances

 Building codes and amendments

 Emergency action plans for dams owned and operated by community

https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk/community-engagement-prioritization-tool

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 Recent news stories about flooding, mitigation, building codes, land development, or other
relevant topics in local media outlets

The Project Team should gather information that will provide insight into how a community
communicates about risk and its actions to reduce flood risk.

All flood risk projects should have a communication plan (referred to here as a stakeholder
engagement plan). The goal of this plan is to help Project Teams keep project stakeholders engaged
during Discovery (and after, if a flood risk project moves forward). The plan also helps Project Teams
effectively integrate stakeholder engagement into other activities in ways that will build sustained,
positive relationships with the community. The engagement plan should include elements such as
the ones listed below.

 Identifying stakeholders

o Who are the primary decision makers in the community? Who are the points of contact for
the study team?

o Are other local, regional, or national stakeholders a priority to include?

 Understanding the Community and Audience

o Basic information about previous flood risk in the community, including the information listed
above as well as the history of major flooding, number of NFIP policyholders, repetitive loss
properties, and CRS rating, should be included.

o Other information that can help Project Teams understand opportunities and barriers to
effective communication and can help frame the key messages within a study area should
also be addressed. These can be drawn from U.S. Census data, recent media coverage,
scans of social media conversation, and other sources of demographic data or community
sentiment.

 Building Key Messages

o The message themes should include understanding flood risks (and the fact that they may
be changing); collaboration and partnership with FEMA to make the flood maps as accurate
as possible; and the importance of mitigating and reducing risks to long-term community
resilience.

 Tactics for Engaging Stakeholders

o The tactics that Project Teams will use to drive the outreach to the community through the
Discovery process (and beyond) are also important. More about common outreach tactics
can be found in the section below.

 Timelines for Engagement

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

o These messages, timelines, and tactics should be aligned with flood study milestones, so the
emphasis on certain messages will shift as a flood study progresses. For example, the
emphasis at the beginning of a mapping study may be, “We want to share data with you to
build the best possible map of your flood risk.” That may change to “We want to make sure
you agree with where we’ve identified risk” during the Preliminary phase, and “We want to
help you communicate flood risks to your community and identify actions you can take to
reduce risks” during the Post-Preliminary phase.

Risk MAP providers can use CERC-developed resources to create a stakeholder engagement plan,
including key messages, appropriate for the project area.

The CERC Playbook is another stakeholder engagement resource for Project Teams. The Playbook
offers tools (not rules) for adapting and applying community engagement resources and best
practices effectively. The Playbook has chapters for every phase of the Risk MAP lifecycle, as well as
chapters that examine the special needs of coastal communities and communities with levees. It
also includes a chapter on using behavioral science insights for effective community engagement.
The Playbook can be accessed through the password-protected RMD SharePoint Portal or the FEMA
Project Officer.

5.4. Stakeholder Engagement Techniques and Tools
The bullets below describe the most common tactics for engaging with stakeholders during a
mapping project. Many—such as face-to-face meetings and virtual meetings or webinars—are
particularly important in the lead-up to the Discovery meeting; others, such as newsletters and
listservs, can be useful between flood risk project milestones to sustain a positive relationship with
the community and keep stakeholders notified of progress. It is also important to consider who is
sharing this information. A flyer from a trusted source, or one posted in a communal area, may be
better received than a phone call from an unknown person. Ultimately, the selected techniques and
tools should be scalable and appropriate for the project stakeholders the team has identified.

 Face-to-Face Meetings: It is important to have ongoing periodic face-to-face meetings with both
internal and external stakeholders/partners who are actively involved in delivering Risk MAP
projects and initiatives. These people may have valuable insights to offer, and their support for
the flood mapping study will be key to its success. Although face-to-face meetings are resource
intensive, they are invaluable for developing relationships and fostering trust, especially among
new partners.

 Conference Calls: Facilitated conference calls are useful for ongoing periodic engagement with
internal and external stakeholders/partners who are actively involved in the delivery of Risk MAP
projects and initiatives and support the overall success of the Risk MAP program.

 Virtual Meetings or Webinars: A platform such as Adobe Connect, Zoom or WebEx can be
effective for engagement opportunities that involve delivering a lot of information, that require
attendees to see the materials being discussed, with a distributed audience, or that include

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

orientation and training. Depending on the platform, these sessions can be recorded, allowing
participants to review sessions at a later date or forward the recording to others.

 Social Media: Social media can be used effectively to remind invited participants about
upcoming events (e.g., conference calls, virtual meetings or webinars, conferences, workshops)
and engage with communities as a project progresses. In coordination with the External Affairs
office in a FEMA region, Project Teams could consider posting upcoming community meetings on
the region’s social media accounts.

 Fact Sheets, Flyers, and Brochures: Project Teams have often relied on printed publications for
communicating with stakeholders. These one-way communication tools can be effective for
making complex information easier to understand and pass on. While these materials are
helpful, Project Teams should not rely on them. They should be used for purposes such as virtual
meeting, webinar or meeting announcements, or as “leave-behinds” at in-person meetings and
workshops. They should also be written in plain language—aiming for an 8th-grade reading level.

 Newsletters and Listservs: Project Teams can use e-newsletters or email listservs to
communicate on a regular basis with federal and state partners, regional entities, and local
communities that have signed up to receive this information—particularly between project
milestones.

 State/Regional Conferences, Meetings, and Workshops: Participation in state and regional
conferences, meetings, and workshops sponsored by key professional associations and
nongovernmental organizations can be an effective way to engage with multiple groups and
individuals. Likewise, workshops led by the Project Team can be valuable mechanisms for
building relationships and sharing information on an ongoing basis.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 Templates: To facilitate engagement with federal and state partners, professional associations,
and other NGOs, FEMA regional offices and FEMA headquarters have developed templates to
use for letters, email messages, newsletter articles, and communication tracking. Many
templates are available in the CERC Playbook on the password-protected RMD SharePoint Portal.
Project Teams should coordinate with their FEMA Project Officer to use preferred methods of
communication and templates during all phases of the Risk MAP lifecycle.

Stakeholder Outreach Best Practice: Videos and Community Toolkits

Videos (though they are expensive to produce) can be powerful tools for storytelling and for
making flood risk and resilience personally meaningful to stakeholders. Toolkits offer resources
that can help influential members of the community engage with residents in ways that are more
credible and relevant.

By putting powerful stories and other tools in the hands of those who already have the ear of the
community—rather than in FEMA’s hands—communication around a mapping study can be much
more effective, and study milestones can be more closely linked to the importance of mitigation
investment and community resilience.

FEMA’s Flood Risk Communication Toolkit for Community Officials includes a set of eight videos
for community use. FEMA regions and Project Teams are encouraged to share this toolkit with
local community officials. The tools and videos are intended to empower community officials to
communicate more effectively with the public about flood risk. By doing so, they can help
residents and other stakeholders become full partners in increasing resilience. The toolkit is
available at https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk/communication-toolkit-
community-officials, and the videos are available on FEMA’s YouTube channel at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL720Kw_OojlIUiWw2bDc-On5MjQw13E6e.

https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk/communication-toolkit-community-officials

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

6. Discovery Activities

6.1. Initial and Sustained Contacts with Project Stakeholders
Contacts with watershed/project area stakeholders must involve an ongoing, two-way dialogue (e.g.,
a telephone call, web-enabled meeting, or in-person meeting, as opposed to a letter or email
message with no two-way follow-up conversation) that starts well in advance of Discovery meetings
and continues with regular touchpoints after Discovery meetings. This consistent dialogue is
essential to building a collaborative relationship and partnership throughout the flood risk project.

During the initial contact with a community, the assigned Project Team member should explain the
Risk MAP program to local officials, discuss the community’s flood mitigation programs and projects
(completed, ongoing, and planned), request data, and discuss setting up Discovery meetings.
Additionally, during conversations with local officials, Project Team members should listen for, or
even ask for, community concerns related to flood risk, everyday activities they conduct that may
reduce flood risk, and related information. Such conversations are likely to be needed with multiple
community officials, because the FPAs may not have enough insight into the activities of other
departments and programs in the community. These contacts provide opportunities for the Project
Team to confirm the validity of information that was gathered prior to the Project Planning phase or
during the community website review.

Stakeholder Outreach Best Practice: Establishing Community Working Groups

Project Teams should consider creating community working groups in the early stages of a flood
risk project. These working groups are typically made up of influential stakeholders from the
community—elected officials, business leaders, and civic leaders, for example. These local
leaders typically have more credibility with residents and can help them understand the purpose
of the mapping study and how it can contribute to long-term community resilience.

An example of a working group in this type of setting is the Lackawanna County Flood Risk
Coalition (LCFRC) in Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania. FEMA Region 3 brought together the
LCFRC to support the community’s understanding of a mapping update that will result in the
county’s first digital, countywide maps. The LCFRC is made up of more than 20 community
members from 14 organizations, united by a shared commitment to increase flood risk
awareness and adopt measures to protect the area’s property and prosperity from the effects of
flooding. The LCFRC has members from both state and local organizations.

Project Teams should work with the CERC provider early in the mapping study process to
determine whether a community working group approach might be the right fit for a particular
study area.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Many stakeholders can participate in the Discovery process. Depending on the size of the
watershed/project area, the Project Team is likely to contact multiple community officials more than
once during this process. However, not every contact must be made by telephone; email messages,
letters, and social media may also be used. FEMA has developed tools and templates (including
assessments, questionnaires, and letter and email templates) to assist Project Team members in
engaging stakeholders. Project Team members are encouraged to use the tools and templates that
seem appropriate for their watershed or project and to revise or change them as necessary, in
accordance with the guidance provided by the FEMA Project Officer. The tools and templates are
accessible through the password-protected RMD SharePoint Portal. Project Team members should
confer with the FEMA Project Officer to determine whether a region-specific version of a template is
available, before using the templates above.

The Discovery process provides an opportunity to discuss Risk MAP goals with communities and to
begin collecting information that will help identify Risk MAP successes. The Project Team should
engage communities and tribes in a dialogue about what mitigation looks like, what the community’s
existing mitigation priorities are, and—most importantly—what information and resources the
community has to take those actions.

6.2. Mitigation Planning Activities and Local Hazard Mitigation Plans
The Discovery process, as the first opportunity for engagement in each Risk MAP project, is an
optimal time to talk with communities about mitigation actions related to their flood risk. Through the
Discovery process, FEMA will work with the local, tribal, regional, state, and federal partners in the
watershed/project area to define the scope of the Risk MAP project, based on the area’s flood risk
and capabilities. Through this process, the Project Team should identify current, completed, and
planned mitigation actions within the watershed/project area. These will help define the project
scope, but also begin the work with communities to help them better understand the role of
mitigation in reducing their risk.

6.2.1. DATA AND INFORMATION COLLECTION
At the beginning of the Discovery process, the Project Team will begin collecting data and
information from federal, state, tribal, and local sources. In addition to the more technical data, the
Project Team should collect information on areas of vulnerability that need to be mitigated through
future actions, as well as details on completed mitigation projects. The Project Team can gather this
information from the following sources: current hazard mitigation plans (HMPs), records of past
flooding issues and high-water marks, records of projects and applications for Hazard Mitigation
Assistance (HMA) program funding, applications for HHPD funding, and community interviews or
questionnaires. The information will help the communities understand how such actions will reduce
their flood risk and begin to identify areas that would benefit from future action (for the Areas of
Mitigation Interest Flood Risk Product dataset).

A review of the local HMPs and Mitigation Assessment Team reports, recovery advisories, and case
studies for communities in the watershed or project area will help identify areas that were highly

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

vulnerable to flooding during past disasters, determine previously identified actions to address
community vulnerabilities, and identify ongoing or completed projects that address these flood
vulnerabilities. The Project Team can review past FIS reports, high-water mark data from state Silver
Jackets teams or the U.S. Geological Survey, and other community records to identify areas that were
strongly affected by disasters in the past. Identifying past HMA projects will show what has been
done to address previously identified vulnerable areas, as well as identifying areas that are still
vulnerable to flooding despite a concentration of completed projects.

FPAs, elected officials, planners, and emergency managers in each community have the best
information about the areas of flooding vulnerability, opportunities for future action, previously
identified projects or actions, and ongoing or completed projects. The Project Team should begin
gathering this information at the beginning of the Discovery process and use the collected
information to improve its engagement with the communities and to identify additional information
to include in the Discovery report.

6.2.2. DISCOVERY MEETING
The information collected during the Discovery process will inform the content of the Discovery
meeting. It will also guide engagement with community representatives before, during, and after the
Discovery meeting (see Section 7.0 for additional information on the Discovery meeting). The
Discovery meeting provides an opportunity to help community representatives understand the
Risk MAP process and to identify the type of information that best informs that process. It also gives
the Project Team a chance to begin discussions with the community about how mitigation actions
can contribute to risk reduction. During the Discovery meeting, the Project Team should present the
actions that have been identified and accomplished to address the area’s flood vulnerability; explain
the importance of identifying and applying additional actions in each affected community; and
describe how these actions relate to the Risk MAP process, the HMP, and the HMA cycle. After
discussing these issues at the meeting, the team can identify additional areas of vulnerability that
communities may want to address.

6.2.3. COORDINATION WITH MITIGATION PLANNING ACTIVITIES AND HAZARD
MITIGATION PLANS

Throughout the Risk MAP process, the Project Team should coordinate with other ongoing efforts in
the watershed/project area, including mitigation projects and the process of developing or updating
HMPs. During the Discovery phase, this can start with aligning project meetings and engagement
with related community meetings. For example, if a community is meeting to maintain or update its
HMP, the Project Team can align project meetings with the HMP meeting schedule. This can increase
attendance and participation by stakeholders involved in both processes. Additionally, if a
community maintains a website that community members view regularly, the Project Team can work
with the community to post information about its meetings, information requests, and project
statuses there. Relevant websites could be sponsored by community administrative, business,
projects, or planning departments, including work on comprehensive plans, HMPs, or other
emergency management plans.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Coordination between the Risk MAP and HMP processes extends beyond engagement. It includes
sharing information between the flood risk project and the HMP. The HMP is a good source of
information for the Discovery process, but as the plan is maintained and projects are completed,
their effects can also inform later phases of the flood risk project. The HMP can help the Project
Team identify new stakeholders, new land development that changes an area’s vulnerability, and
completed projects that reduce the effects of flooding. Similarly, many products that Risk MAP
delivers can help community members develop and update their HMP. Identifying the potential areas
of coordination with the stakeholders involved in the communities’ HMPs during Discovery will help
ensure that these areas can be integrated into the flood risk project at the outset.

Mitigation Assessment Team reports, recovery advisories, and case studies also may help the Project
Team identify additional stakeholders as well as recommended mitigation activities and local
floodplain management and building code update needs.

6.3. Data and Information Collection and Evaluation
One goal of the stakeholder engagement effort is for the Project Team to become familiar with the
watershed or project area. On the technical side, this includes getting information on community
flood hazards, flood risks, and stormwater and floodplain management activities, such as public
works or parks department activities. It may also include collecting socioeconomic data, information
about economic drivers in the watershed, and other information that helps Project Team members
engage strategically with community officials on the issues that matter most to them.

6.4. Data and Information Collection Activities
Before engaging with communities, the Project Team should work, as appropriate, with people in the
public and private sectors (including FEMA headquarters staff) to collect and review the extensive
variety of data and information documented in Section 7 of “Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and
Mapping: Discovery.”

Data and information collection activities should begin immediately after the initial contact with key
flood risk project stakeholders, so that when the Discovery meetings are held, the Project Team has
collected most of the necessary information. The data collection activities will help support the
production of regulatory products and Flood Risk Products, but they will also give team members the
context and background to make decisions on the appropriate hazard mitigation technical
assistance and support needed to develop a practical and effective communication and outreach
plan that suits each community. Data collection activities may also help the Project Team develop a
better understanding of the best ways to share information with the community in the future.

Working closely with project stakeholders allows the Project Team to gain a sense of the community
staff and their ability to contribute to the flood risk project. If the communities in a specific
watershed or project area do not have dedicated FPAs or GIS analysts, for example, the Project Team
may need to develop a comprehensive plan for delivering the Flood Risk Products to ensure the
products are used to the fullest advantage.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Working in partnership with project stakeholders will help the Project Team determine whether
(1) the affected communities have comprehensive plans, (2) the HMPs are coordinated with the
comprehensive plans, (3) local governments have experience with flood disasters and flood disaster
recovery, and (4) the communities coordinate floodplain management programs with programs for
managing and planning for open space. The partnership also will help the Project Team determine if
the communities have planning staff or planning/zoning commissions and mechanisms such as
ordinances, administrative plans, or other programs, to mitigate flood loss and contribute to effective
floodplain and stormwater management.

Project Team members should build relationships with community officials to learn about the daily
activities and actions the communities take to reduce stormwater runoff, maintain channels, etc.
Because these activities may work to manage or reduce flood risk, knowing that they take place is
important for the Project Team to understand the level of risk in the watershed. In addition, this
information will help Project Team members work with communities to determine where they can
incorporate flood risk communication, mitigation planning, and risk reduction into their plans. This
information will also help Project Team members explore how communities can become involved in
the CRS or expand their activities to improve their CRS classification.

A major activity that reduces a community’s flood losses is participation in, and full compliance with,
the NFIP. Therefore, Project Team members also should review historical information on community
participation in the NFIP and its compliance with NFIP regulations. This information will contribute to
an understanding of past relations between the community and FEMA and will improve the Project
Team’s insight into community efforts toward flood risk reduction.

Some NFIP compliance issues that may be helpful to know about during Discovery are physical
changes to Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) or regulatory floodways that took place without
Conditional Letters of Map Revision and Letters of Map Revision. If the Project Team identifies any
issues of non-compliant development in SFHAs or floodways, members can discuss those issues with
the community early in the Risk MAP lifecycle. Project Team members also should review information
on the number of “Submit to Rate” flood insurance policies and cases that represent a potential
violation of NFIP regulations. This information can help the Project Team recommend improvements.

In regions of the United States where ice jams are typical, the Project Team should investigate
historical floods for evidence of ice-jam contribution. The Project Team will coordinate their
methodology with the affected communities and state as part of the Discovery process.

Project Team members are encouraged to ask for community input on planned development to
determine the risk class of the study areas, with input from the state and local officials. The risk
class, which can be based on factors such as county decile, population growth data, repetitive
losses, and at-risk infrastructure, can vary within a watershed. The community, state, and FEMA
representatives can agree to the risk classifications during the Discovery process.

Additionally, the Project Team should identify areas of increasing population and development within
the 1- and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplains.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Project Team members should ask communities what they need to support their flood risk
communication and mitigation planning. Where an enhanced Risk MAP dataset can support specific
community needs, FEMA and the community will discuss the dataset as a potential element of the
project.

The Project Team will also determine what kinds of mitigation planning technical assistance could be
appropriate. To do this, Project Team members should request information about whether the
community has received, is currently using, or intends to apply for federal grants to support
mitigation planning, or whether an application for a mitigation planning grant is under review. If
federal funds are being used, Project Team members should determine whether the community
needs FEMA or CTP assistance or has hired a contractor to help develop the mitigation plan.

The state historical preservation office may help Project Team members determine the location of
relevant assets (including sites of cultural, historic, and religious significance), and Project Team
members can verify or discuss this information with communities. This information is integral to the
planning process and to mitigation.

6.5. Data and Information Analysis Activities
As data and information are collected, they should be analyzed thoughtfully. This analysis has three
main purposes:

1. To give the Project Team a more complete understanding of the nature of flooding in the
watershed/project area and the activities that communities take to address their flood risk.

Communities often act to reduce flood hazards and risks in ways that are not directly related to
the NFIP, such as implementing stormwater management activities. Understanding flood risk
from the community’s perspective may make the Project Team more successful in encouraging
the community to reduce its flood risk.

2. To summarize the data and information available to develop the regulatory products and Flood
Risk Products.

It is important to know what kind of data and information are available, which parts of the
watershed or project area they relate to, whether they are usable and meet FEMA’s quality
standards for developing Risk MAP products, and whether they cover the areas with the highest
flood risk. If quality data and information are available, but only for areas of low risk, the Project
Team may still determine that a flood risk project would not be beneficial. A project must be
warranted by both risk and need.

3. To understand what types of mitigation planning technical assistance may be appropriate for the
project area.

The data, information, and analysis may be used in an optional Discovery map, as appropriate,
and the collection and analysis processes will be described in a required Discovery report. The
Discovery map and report are discussed in more detail in Sections 6.6 and 6.7.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

6.6. Discovery Map
The Project Team may create a draft Discovery map using the collected data and information and
share it with communities and other stakeholders to facilitate discussion and collaboration about
future flood risk data development and mitigation actions in the watershed. If produced, the Project
Team will bring a draft Discovery map to Discovery meetings to spur discussion and may provide a
final Discovery map after the Discovery meetings.

Project Team members should include all spatial data in the Discovery map database, so that it can
be presented during the meeting. While combining certain data layers may work best to show areas
of risk, all data should be available. The data and information to include on the optional Discovery
Map is documented in Section 9 of “Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping: Discovery.” A
sample Discovery map also is provided in that section.

6.7. Discovery Report
The Project Team should update the required Discovery report as needed throughout the Discovery
process. The team should consider it a “living” resource that is just as important to the community
as it is to FEMA. It should be written with the community’s needs in mind, and an 8th-grade reading
level is ideal. Community officials should be able to use it to build awareness and support for
reducing the community’s risk.

The Discovery report can be a key community engagement tool for the FEMA Project Team as the
flood study progresses. Developing an approachable and easy-to-understand report can help
establish trust and transparency at the beginning of the study process and potentially avoid
misunderstandings down the line. Organize the content clearly, so that it can be easily followed.
Break up copy with visuals, such as photos of local landmarks or simple graphics that explain
complex concepts. Many mapping-related graphics are available on the RMD SharePoint Portal. (The
CERC provider can help the Project Team develop useful and accessible Discovery reports.)

The Project Team should include the following information in the Discovery report:

 A list of the stakeholders contacted

 The data and information collected

 Whether the data can be used for regulatory products, Flood Risk Products, or both

 A thoughtful analysis and description of the data and information, explaining why it is relevant to
the study and how it will be used or applied (for example, what Mitigation Planning Technical
Assistance might be appropriate for the watershed or project area)

The Project Team should share an initial version of the Discovery report with project stakeholders
before the Discovery meetings. It will contain the information listed above. After the Discovery

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

meetings, the Project Team should share a final version. This report should also include meeting
notes, sign-in sheets, and information obtained during the meeting.

Additional information on Discovery reports is provided in Section 10 of “Guidance for Flood Risk
Analysis and Mapping: Discovery.” The Project Team can obtain a template for a Discovery report
from the Flood Risk Templates and Other Resources webpage at https://www.fema.gov/media-
library/assets/documents/32786?id=7577.

7. Discovery Meeting
A Discovery meeting with project stakeholders is required, but it should not be the Project Team’s
first contact with community officials. Rather, it is an opportunity to increase understanding, confirm
priorities, and identify any remaining knowledge gaps. It is also an opportunity to build deeper
relationships with communities and to help decision makers think about creating a more resilient
future. If possible, the Project Team and a local champion or key influencer should co-lead each
Discovery meeting.

The Discovery meeting is also a crucial way to get the additional data and information needed to
inform the next phase of the mapping project. To accomplish this, the Project Team must understand
as much as possible about the area’s flood hazards and risk before the meeting. Discovery meetings
are intended to be working meetings, not FEMA briefings; the Project Team should encourage open
dialogue and two-way communication with all participants.

Before preparing for the meeting, Project Teams should consider three important questions:

1. What do community leaders hope to get out of this meeting?

2. What will community officials get from FEMA at this meeting?

3. What does FEMA hope to get out of this meeting?

To answer these questions before the Discovery meeting, the Project Team should consider a
planning meeting or conference call with key stakeholders. This is also an opportunity to choose a
time and place for the Discovery meeting(s) that will allow the most people to attend and actively
participate. The Discovery meeting may be the Project Team’s first formal face-to-face meeting with
most, if not all, key stakeholders. For distributed audiences where remote engagement is either
necessary or could help to improve engagement, virtual meetings or a hybrid of face-to-face and
virtual engagement may be used. Invite a broad representation of watershed/project area
stakeholders. When appropriate, hold multiple Discovery meetings to enable greater attendance and
participation.

Practical tips for holding successful Discovery meetings are included in the CERC Playbook. The
Playbook also includes links to templates and tip sheets, including a tip sheet on giving successful
presentations. These tools are available on the password-protected RMD SharePoint Portal.

https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/32786?id=7577

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

7.1. Meeting Timing
The Discovery meeting occurs in the middle of the Discovery phase, after the Project Team has
collected and analyzed appropriate data and information. The Project Team should work with the
communities in the project area to choose a time and place, or virtual meeting as necessary. The
best time for a Discovery meeting depends on the location. For example, some communities plan to
avoid the opening day of hunting season or dates before and after elections, while coastal
communities often plan to avoid peak tourist season or choose months when part-time citizens can
be present. During the initial stakeholder engagement, FEMA Project Officers can get a sense from
state and local stakeholders for times of the day and year to avoid, as well as when virtual meetings
may invite better engagement.

7.2. Meeting Attendees
It is vitally important that the Project Team identify and invite all appropriate stakeholders to the
Discovery meeting. However, not all the stakeholders that participated in the Discovery process need
to attend the Discovery meetings. At least one representative from each affected community or tribe
should be invited and attend. A wider array of stakeholders may be appropriate, depending on the
project area. Potential invitees for each project include:

 State NFIP Coordinator

 State Hazard Mitigation Officers

 Community floodplain administrators and Chief Executive Officers

 FEMA Regional CRS Coordinator (when applicable)

 Local planner/economic development contacts

 Local emergency management and building officials

It may not be possible for State NFIP Coordinators and SHMOs to attend all the Discovery meetings
in their states; however, their input is invaluable, and the Project Team should talk to them before
the meetings if they can’t attend. The State NFIP Coordinators and SHMOs should be able to suggest
community-level participants to include. The Project Team should also follow up after the meeting
with state-level partners who could not attend.

The Project Team is strongly encouraged to invite a community GIS contact; community and/or
county emergency manager; and engineering, public works, and/or parks/recreation staff members,
as applicable. Community governments can be organized in different ways, so the team should
consider the community’s organizational structure. In some watersheds, it may be possible to
include representatives of other federal agencies, NGOs, and other stakeholders.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

7.3. Inviting Stakeholders
The Project Team should send invitations at least one month before the first Discovery meeting, with
follow-up email messages or telephone calls, to confirm and encourage attendance. The Project
Team should begin planning for the Discovery meeting during the stakeholder coordination stage. In
some areas, it may benefit FEMA to send an introductory message to stakeholders to explain the
process. This message could note that Project Team members will contact them for data,
information, and meeting planning. This message should also encourage invited stakeholders to
disseminate the meeting information to others with relevant interests in the Discovery process.

7.4. Meeting Objectives
A Discovery meeting has the following overarching objectives:

 Engage stakeholders to start a foundation for project-long relationships.

 Understand the needs of each community and tribe within the watershed or project area.

 Introduce or enhance flood risk discussions.

 Balance local needs with FEMA resources, and plan for a possible flood risk project.

Though it is better for the Project Team to meet key stakeholders before the Discovery meeting, this
may be the first time they officially meet, either in person or virtually. As a result, the Discovery
meeting represents an important step in the ongoing development of relationships between FEMA
and the communities in the watershed.

A comprehensive list of Discovery meeting objectives is included below. It is not possible to cover all
of these objectives at every Discovery meeting. However, this list includes the variety of topics that
may be discussed, depending on specific community needs or characteristics:

 Discuss the importance of a flood risk project to help communities understand their risk and act
to reduce it.

 Emphasize that the process is collaborative, and that community input is vital to a successful
flood mapping study.

 Introduce the idea of resilience and discuss the various tactics a community can use to achieve
it.

 Discuss the role of community officials in raising awareness of flood risk and in achieving
resilience.

 Offer the Flood Risk Communication Toolkit as a resource for community leaders to use to
discuss flood risks with residents.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

Toolkit: https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk/communication-toolkit-
community-officials

Videos: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL720Kw_OojlIUiWw2bDc-On5MjQw13E6e

 Get input from stakeholders about their flood risk and needs. Identify areas in need of studies,
outreach, mitigation planning, risk assessments, and other Risk MAP-related products and
services.

 Validate the flood risk data, documentation, and information collected from federal, state,
regional, tribal, and local sources.

 Explain that if a flood risk project is initiated for this watershed or project area, FEMA may
produce regulatory products (e.g., new or updated FIRM[s], FIS report[s], FIRM database) and
Flood Risk Products and/or provide mitigation planning technical assistance.

 Discuss FEMA’s regulatory products and Flood Risk Products, the types of data and information
presented by each product, and how communities can use the products to reduce flood risks.

 Discuss the critical role of mitigation planning in helping communities mitigate, prepare for, and
recover from the effects of flooding and other hazards, and how up-to-date flood risk data is key
to these efforts.

 Discuss community building codes and emphasize the importance of adopting the latest
consensus-based hazard-resistant building codes and standards.

 Discuss the FEMA and non-FEMA programs that help communities reduce their flood risk, as well
as resources for mitigation planning and assistance, such as grant programs, along with related
eligibility and cycle information.

 Encourage communities to participate in the NFIP and review the benefits and responsibilities of
joining. For NFIP participants, encourage compliance with requirements and participation in the
CRS.

 Discuss multi-hazard issues, if necessary and appropriate, while noting that the Risk MAP
program provides products and assistance focusing on flood risk.

 In a coastal community or region, discuss the ways that long-term shoreline erosion, sea level
rise, and sinking land levels (subsidence) may affect them in the future. What will the community
or region look like in 20 years? In 50 years?

 Discuss potential impacts of dams/reservoirs, including HHPDs, as appropriate.

 Ask attendees to see if the data and information gathered before the Discovery meeting is valid,
or if something better is available. Discuss the information collected about flood risk, mitigation
plans, ongoing or planned mitigation projects, and risk assessments.

https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk/communication-toolkit-community-officials

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 Confirm that data-sharing agreements are understood.

 Identify people to champion goals and pass on information and find other community members
or leaders to contact.

 Determine the people with whom to communicate as the project progresses, and discuss what
comes next (including the estimated length of the process, final products, and their future
involvement).

 Discuss the community Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) ratings, a
classification system for building departments and the process for obtaining a rating for those
communities that do not have these ratings.

7.5. Meeting Messages
The Discovery meeting messages should include the information below.

 We want to talk about your community’s flood risks and the fact that they may be changing. We
want to listen to your thoughts and concerns about flood risk in your community and share the
information we have gathered to provide a clear picture about your flood risk. We are fully
committed to partner with your community in this effort.

 We want to gather local information to help make the flood maps as accurate as possible.

 We want to collaborate with you on planning as well as mitigating and communicating about
flood risk.

7.6. Pre-Meeting Activities
The Project Team should take the actions below and compile these materials before the Discovery
meeting.

 Coordinate with project stakeholders, in advance and consistently, to obtain data,
documentation, and information to understand local flood hazards; learn about the area’s risk
assessment, mitigation planning, and risk communication needs or interests; and identify their
resources (including people), assets, plans, and vision.

 Confirm details on the best available data, including the timing of obtaining it; data-sharing
agreements; and useful types for mitigation plan updates and FEMA HMA grant applications.

 Prepare talking points to discuss flood hazard studies, flood risk assessments, mitigation
planning, the watershed approach, and the Risk MAP project lifecycle.

 Review FEMA guidance.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

 Prepare to bring information on NFIP compliance/adoption, if appropriate, such as paper or
electronic copies of FEMA 495, Adoption of Flood Insurance Rate Maps by Participating
Communities, and FEMA 496, Joining the National Flood Insurance Program.

 Prepare and send meeting invitations, a meeting agenda appropriate for the watershed or
project area, a draft Discovery report, and a draft Discovery map. The invitation letter should
clearly state the expectations for the Discovery meeting, including the need for active
participation by community officials and other stakeholders.

 Prepare a tribal contact list and documentation from contacting tribal officials, tribal historic
preservation officers, and others. (If tribal lands are included in a project area, Project Teams
should coordinate with the Regional Office Tribal Liaison.)

 Compile the additional items needed when tribal nations are affected, as defined through
consultation and coordination with tribal officials.

 Refer to the FEMA Building Science Resource Library web page at
https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk-management/building-science/publications.

 Review the PowerPoint presentation associated with FEMA Building Science, titled “Integrating
Building Science into Risk MAP Projects.”

 Prepare information to facilitate community adoption of, and compliance with, the latest
consensus-based hazard-resistant building codes and standards, and prepare talking points on
the relevance of FEMA Building Science and building codes.

 Compile FEMA Regional Building Science contact information to give to the community
participants.

 Obtain information on BCEGS ratings and the process for obtaining a rating, including the BCEGS
Questionnaire, to give to the community participants.

7.7. Meeting Activities
During the Discovery meeting, the Project Team listens and learns what is important to community
officials and project stakeholders. Each Discovery meeting should include an interactive,
collaborative discussion. During the Discovery meeting, the Project Team should facilitate
discussions between community officials and watershed stakeholders, offer suggestions, and
manage the time. Meeting participants must have a sense of ownership for the recommendations
resulting from the meeting. If so, they will be more likely to take this information back to their
colleagues or constituents and generate support for projects that may follow.

The Project Team may share the Discovery map at the Discovery meeting to provide an overall
picture of flood risk in the watershed/project area. The GIS format of the Discovery map allows a
user to zoom in and out to specific areas in response to the meeting discussions. It is best to have a

https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk-management/building-science/publications.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

GIS specialist present to help in this way, but if that is not possible, Project Team members could
bring printed copies of the Discovery map if produced. Some copies should show the whole
watershed/project area, and others should show highlighted areas of importance, based on the
Discovery effort. Alternatively, a state, tribal, or local partner may be able to assist with the Discovery
map presentation.

The most efficient and productive Discovery meeting will include simple documents and maps that
summarize the data and illustrate the risk areas. The meeting is not the time for all stakeholders to
evaluate the data independently; the Project Team should present the analyzed data and
information in a logical way that allows the majority of the time to be focused on gaining a better
understanding of the flood risk for all participants.

Project Team members can use the tools and templates, including an agenda and presentation, that
FEMA developed for Discovery meetings; however, the Project Team should tailor the materials for
the communities they are engaging. The tools and templates are accessible through the password-
protected RMD SharePoint Portal or the FEMA Project Officer.

7.8. Post-Meeting Activities
Several activities are necessary after the Discovery meeting to finalize the Discovery effort. The
Project Team should give all community and tribal participants an opportunity to review and correct
any data and information collected during the Discovery process before the final Discovery map and
Discovery report are distributed. The Project Team should add the meeting notes and other meeting
information, such as attendance records, to the Discovery report and distribute it to attendees and
those who could not attend. The Project Team should keep this information on file, along with any
community or stakeholder correspondence records and a community contact list that includes
contacts for the counties and every incorporated community in the project area.

The Project Team should also update the Discovery map with any additional information, including
areas discussed or decisions made at the Discovery meeting, and distribute it to communities.
Project Team members will also follow up with community officials, as appropriate, to determine their
progress toward FEMA Risk MAP metrics.

The FEMA Project Officer will determine whether to proceed with a flood risk project, given the data,
documentation, and information the Project Team gathered during the Discovery process. As
mentioned earlier, flood risk projects may include mapping, risk assessment, mitigation planning
technical assistance, and/or other assistance, such as outreach and communication planning. A
project may be appropriate in an area, even if the effective flood hazard information is found to be
valid, because mitigation planning technical assistance is needed. Alternatively, if the FIRMs are
valid, the risk is low, and the watershed communities are involved in actions to reduce their risk, a
flood risk project may not be needed. If the communities have no interest in the Risk MAP program,
efforts may be better spent in areas where the products are desired.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

If the engineering model or models that will be used to update the flood hazard information shown
on the FIRM(s) are known at this stage, to comply with Section 216 of BW-12, the roject Team must
notify each community affected by the update of the planned model or models to be used and
provide the community with (1) an explanation of why the model or models are appropriate, and (2) a
30-day period (beginning on the date of notification) to confer with FEMA regarding the
appropriateness of the model or models to be used. Project Team members should refer to
“Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement: Preliminary Production” for more detailed information about
implementation, best practices, and associated tools and templates. The Project Team should file
copies of all communications with the community CEO and FPA about the models in the community
file discussed in Section 11.0 of this document.

8. Automated Engineering
If a flood risk project is appropriate for the watershed/project area and the project involves the
issuance of new or revised regulatory products (i.e., FIRMs, FIS reports, or a FIRM database), the
Project Team should coordinate with the affected communities to discuss anticipated changes to the
flood hazard and risk depicted on the FIRM and in the FIS report. This engagement will help set
community expectations regarding map revisions and their effects on existing structures and help
refine the scope of the flood risk project.

The Project Team should use the information collected during the Discovery process, including
mapping needs, Community Needs Management System information, and information collected on
new development to inform this engagement. For example, if the information collected during the
Discovery process and discussed at the Discovery meeting(s) reveals that significant development
after the original flood study has increased flood discharges, then the discussion should elaborate
on areas where the flood elevations are likely to increase if a new study is initiated. This engagement
occurs before the Project Team initiates a flood risk project. The discussions must include an
explanation of the expected impacts of potential study results (i.e., increase/decrease in flood
hazard area delineations, increase/decrease in flood elevations). Those expectations may also be
documented in the Project Charter, if appropriate. The Project Team should develop the Project
Charter concurrently through coordination with community officials and tribal entities (when
appropriate). The Project Charter is optional, and additional information is provided in Section 9.1.

In coastal areas where an updated surge model is available, the Project Team must use data from
the model to foster these discussions with communities. In cases where the surge study is
completed before Discovery, the Project Team should ensure that this information is reviewed and
discussed at Discovery meetings.

9. Scope Refinement
The Project Team must develop a scope of work for the flood risk project in coordination with
community officials, tribal entities (if appropriate), and state partners. Several standards related to
regulatory product production could be discussed with communities during the process to refine this

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

scope of work. For instance, because all regulatory floodway changes must be coordinated with
affected community officials and other stakeholders as early as possible, the scope refinement
process may be a good time to start these conversations if a regulatory floodway change is expected.
Other examples are listed below:

 The Project Team should engage communities to determine their preference on a vector-based
map versus a raster-based map.

 Communities should discuss with FEMA whether any reservoirs are in the watershed/project
area and how they are to be analyzed.

 If a community wants to use local transportation features data in place of the default U.S.
Census Bureau Master Address File /Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and
Referencing transportation data, the Project Team should discuss the format and structure of the
data with the community.

 To calculate regulatory floodways using methodologies other than steady-state, one-dimensional
models, the FEMA Project Officer and the affected communities and states with floodway
authority must approve the approach in advance.

 For coastal FIRM updates, the Limit of Moderate Wave Action (LiMWA) must be included in the
FIRM database if it has been calculated as part of a coastal flood risk project, and it will normally
be shown on the affected FIRM panels. Communities can request not to have the LiMWA shown
on the FIRM, but certain timelines and requirements apply. Scope refinement would be a good
time for the Project Team to introduce the LiMWA concept, describe its purpose, and share
information with the community.

 In all cases, regulatory products and Flood Risk Products must be based on hydrologic and
hydraulic analyses or coastal analyses using existing ground conditions in the watershed and
floodplain, and multiple-profile and floodway runs must have the same physical characteristics in
common for existing ground conditions. However, a community may choose to include flood
hazard information that is based on future conditions on a FIRM (shown as shaded Zone X); in an
FIS report; or in Flood Risk Products, in addition to the existing conditions. Scope refinement may
be a good time to discuss whether a community would be interested in showing future conditions
and whether data exists to support showing such information on a FIRM.

 Areas of shallow flooding must not have modeled/computed regulatory floodways due to the
inherent uncertainties associated with their flow patterns. However, communities can choose to
have administrative floodways for such areas. Scope refinement is a good time for the Project
Team to discuss whether a community is interested in having an administrative floodway shown
on the FIRM.

 Because any existing mismatches in floodplain and flood hazard information between
communities and counties must be resolved as part of a FIRM and FIS report update, scope

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

refinement is a good time for the Project Team to identify such locations and discuss with the
communities the best way these mismatches can be resolved.

 Where ice jams occur, the Project Team must take backwater effects into account. The Project
Team should coordinate with the community to determine the appropriate methodology for the
floodway designation in areas mapped with an ice-jam analysis. The Discovery process provides
an opportunity to acquire as much data as possible concerning ice-jam events in the community,
on the streams being studied, and in the region. Scope refinement is a good time for the Project
Team to discuss these issues with communities.

 The FEMA Regional Risk Analysis Branch Chief must provide written approval for the use of an
alluvial fan methodology before a full analysis is begun. To inform this decision, the Project Team
must provide sufficient field data and analysis and records of community engagement relative to
the scope and methodology.

 If a revised FIS report will be prepared, an assessment of the current, effective FIS report may be
helpful in determining the level of effort needed. A section-by-section review of the effective FIS
report may be useful, and community input is valuable for this process. Scope refinement is a
good time for the Project Team to obtain this input from community officials.

FEMA’s goal is to have the entire inventory of flood hazard products referenced to the North
American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), and several standards are related to datum
conversions. If regulatory product revisions are planned, datum conversion may be an appropriate
topic for the Project Team to discuss during scope refinement with communities that have an
effective FIRM referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. The Project Team should
explain the datum conversion process to the community and clarify why conversion to NAVD88 is
recommended.

The Project Team also should inform community officials that FEMA, in collaboration with the
National Geodetic Survey, has developed many datum conversion protocols, designed to ensure that
all converted flood elevations retain their original value to within 0.25 foot. The protocols also ensure
that no existing flood hazard determinations (primarily Letters of Map Amendment and Letters of
Map Revision Based on Fill) would change as a result.

The Project Team also should inform community officials that full documentation of the datum
conversion will be shared with them during the process and will be documented in the Technical
Support Data Notebook after the project has been completed. For communities that do not wish to
have their FIRM and other products converted to NAVD88, FEMA may grant a waiver; however, the
Project Team should explain the negative impact this decision will have on the ability to revise the
products in the future.

FEMA also has some standards associated with the types of data collected and how these data can
be used. For instance, locally provided, sourced, or validated building footprint, location, and/or

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

population data are the only acceptable data sources for populating structure and population count
attributes within the Changes Since Last FIRM dataset.

To the extent that these data sources will be used for the flood risk project, the Project Team should
discuss this standard with community officials who may be providing such information. The Project
Team should also inform the community officials that FEMA must be able to distribute the base map
data and floodplain information freely to the public in hardcopy and digital formats. Therefore, if
community-supplied base map data will be used, this should be discussed during scope refinement.

To validate and revise the preliminary list of potentially useful geospatial data for use in a flood risk
project, the Project Team should invite comments on the list from members of the geospatial data
community interested in the geographic area of the project. Also, Project Team members should
communicate with the appropriate federal, state, and local entities.

Many of the Flood Risk Datasets require a significant amount of data collection and coordination, but
rely on other federal, state, and local sources. An outreach process in which the Project Team
familiarizes stakeholders with the type and format of data sought is important.

A community CEO or FPA may provide feedback on the engineering model or models that will be used
to update the flood hazard information shown on a FIRM during the stakeholder engagement
process discussed in Subsection 5.1.2. The Project Team must notify each community affected by
the new model or models to be used, in writing, via hardcopy or email message, to satisfy the
requirements of SID 620.

FEMA must be notified of any potential floodplain management violations identified through the
submittal of new or revised flood hazard data. If data is submitted or violations are uncovered
through the Discovery process, the Project Team should notify appropriate FEMA regional office staff
of the issue(s) so the appropriate regional office staff can conduct appropriate coordination with the
state and community.

The Project Team must share the final, purchased scope of work with project stakeholders.

The Project Team should maintain all project documents, including letters; transmittals;
memorandums; general status reports and queries; documentation of technical issues; a narrative
that summarizes the scope, assumptions, and issues; and any information that may be useful for
everyone working on the flood risk project or subsequent users of the data generated during the
Discovery process.

In addition to scopes of work for mapping and engineering activities, scopes of work for community
engagement and risk communication should be developed. These will cover engagement activities
for the next phase or phases of the Risk MAP lifecycle. The Project Team should tailor these activities
to the needs of each community, include ongoing communication and dialogue with key
stakeholders, and focus on (1) increasing awareness of and belief in local flood risks,
(2) establishing the value of mapping data as a tool for increasing local resiliency, and (3) increasing
the propensity of communities to commit to mitigation actions.

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

9.1. Project Charter
If a flood risk project will be undertaken in the watershed/project area, the Project Team, community,
and other key stakeholders could use the Project Charter as a means of documenting the scope of
the project and other items. The Project Team should develop a Project Charter in coordination with
stakeholders in the watershed/project area, and all parties should sign it where possible. The Project
Team should obtain the Project Charter template from the Project Officer or other FEMA Regional
Office staff. The Project Charter should be renamed if the term “charter” is not acceptable to
community officials.

The Project Charter is not a binding agreement, but a tool to convey a clear understanding of the
project scope and its impact in a community. The Project Charter also is a way for the Project Team
to assist communities in developing a sense of “ownership” in the flood risk project. Therefore, while
not required, the Project Team should encourage community officials to sign and return a final
Project Charter. If used, the Project Team should encourage as many affected communities as
possible to sign the Project Charter.

10. Finalizing Discovery
The goals of stakeholder engagement during the Discovery process are to understand the needs of
the communities in a watershed/project area, introduce or enhance flood risk discussions, balance
FEMA resources with a plan for a possible flood risk project, and coordinate with project
stakeholders to define the project scope. For watersheds/project areas that will not receive a flood
risk project, the Discovery process is finalized after FEMA has delivered the final Discovery report
and Discovery map to the affected communities. For watersheds/project areas for which flood risk
projects will be performed, the Discovery process is finalized after the automated engineering
analysis and communication (if required) have been completed, and a project scope of work and
Project Charter, if used, have been prepared. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act to ensure that all people have equal access to
communication, reports that will be posted to a government website should be made 508-compliant
prior to posting.

Additional information on the project scope of work and Project Charter is provided in Section 13 of
“Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping: Discovery.”

11. File Maintenance
To be compliant with Section 66.3 of the NFIP regulations (44 CFR 66.3), the Project Team needs to
maintain community files for the communities affected by the project, following protocols established
by the FEMA regional office. The Project Team should place records of engagement activities (e.g.,
letters, email messages, memorandums, meeting notes) during the Discovery phase in the
community files. The Project Team should add the meeting notes and other Discovery meeting
information distributed to Discovery process participants, along with a community contact list that

Guidance for Stakeholder Engagement, Project Planning and Discovery Process

includes contact information for the county and every incorporated community in the
watershed/project area, in the community file.

Any letters or memorandums used to implement the requirements of Section 216 of BW12, as
discussed in Subsection 5.1.2, should also be included in the community file. If, for any reason,
community files had not been established previously, the Project Team should establish these files
at this time, following protocols established by the FEMA regional office.

2. Audiences

3. Additional Resources and Tools

4. Project Planning and Discovery—Overview of Objectives

4.1. Project Planning Phase

4.2. Discovery Phase

5. The Importance of Stakeholder Engagement

5.1. Stakeholder Engagement Goals

5.1.1. Discovery Planning

5.1.2. Discovery Phase

Collecting and Maintaining Stakeholder Contact Information

5.2. Types of Stakeholders

5.2.1. Introduction

5.2.2. Internal Stakeholders

5.2.3. External Stakeholders – Public Sector

Other Federal Agencies

Regional and State Partners

Potential Regional and State Partners

Federal and State Elected Officials

Local Partners

5.3. Pre-Discovery Meeting Engagement Activities

5.4. Stakeholder Engagement Techniques and Tools

6. Discovery Activities

6.1. Initial and Sustained Contacts with Project Stakeholders

6.2. Mitigation Planning Activities and Local Hazard Mitigation Plans

6.2.1. Data and Information Collection

6.2.2. Discovery Meeting

6.2.3. Coordination with Mitigation Planning Activities and Hazard Mitigation Plans

6.3. Data and Information Collection and Evaluation

6.4. Data and Information Collection Activities

6.5. Data and Information Analysis Activities

6.6. Discovery Map

6.7. Discovery Report

7. Discovery Meeting

7.1. Meeting Timing

7.2. Meeting Attendees

7.3. Inviting Stakeholders

7.4. Meeting Objectives

7.5. Meeting Messages

7.6. Pre-Meeting Activities

7.7. Meeting Activities

7.8. Post-Meeting Activities

8. Automated Engineering

9. Scope Refinement

9.1. Project Charter

10. Finalizing Discovery

11. File Maintenance

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Module 5 foundations emergency managment ”

Get high-quality paper

Guarantee! All work is written by expert writers!

Still stressed from student homework?

Get quality assistance from academic writers!

Order now